International Trade Committee on March 27th, 2013

[Dr. Gus Van Harten]

I have been a member of—

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair. I do think that's an unfair question. Are we going to start asking witnesses if they've ever been a member of a political party?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

It's not a point of order.

Go ahead. You can ask whatever question....

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

I think that's unfair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

You're not obligated to answer in any specific way.

Go ahead.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

We'll be asking all the witnesses this question.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

I just wanted to clarify if you're Angus Van Harten who's donated on multiple occasions to both the NDP and an NDP leadership candidate. Would that be you?

[Dr. Gus Van Harten]

I have donated to four different political parties in my life, including the NDP.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Okay.

I just have a list of your donating to the NDP about eleven times in the last couple of years. I think it's important the committee, in our deliberations, know if we're dealing with somebody who's an academic or has a partisan hat on.

I just want to clarify that.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Everybody's getting this question now, just so you know.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Do you have a question, Mr. Cannan?

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

I just wanted to know which perspective it was, whether a non-partisan hat or an NDP hat or an academic hat that you're wearing.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

I think he's answered that.

Go ahead. Do you have another one?

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Sorry, I didn't hear the answer.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

The answer was that he's here as an academic and would attempt to be as—

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

There's nothing wrong with that. We have Conservative academics who are witnesses. I had a chance to debate on CBC with Mr. Van Harten, and I think it's important that he declares his partisanship, that's all.

[Marc-André Morin, NDP, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I think the question is totally irrelevant. Even though over the months we've suspected that some witnesses were partisan, we've never asked that type of question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Yes, and that's debate; it's not a point of order.

But go ahead. Do you have another question?

[Marc-André Morin, NDP, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

It's an attack on the credibility of the witness .

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

We should move on.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

I have a question for Mr. Vidler, then. In your handout, you mentioned:

...that Canada [should not ]not sacrifice quality for speed. An ambitious and comprehensive agreement that secures real, long-term market access for Canadian companies and their Indian counterparts is an achievement worth waiting for. In the meantime, negotiations could be aided by concerted efforts to raise Canada's visibility in India.

I have two questions. You're saying that it's not a matter of time being the essence here, but that we should reach a quality agreement versus being expedient. Second, you're asking what Canada could do to increase our visibility and profile while we're in negotiations with the government in India, which could have an election in next May.

[Cam Vidler]

To clarify the question, I think our position is that it's important that certain issues and barriers identified by Canadian business are included in this agreement. We don't want a symbolic agreement. We want an agreement that will increase real market opportunities for Canadian companies. We would love to see that happen as soon as possible. We are cognizant of the fact that there is an election next year in India and that these things can make it more difficult to implement afterwards. This is obviously a balance that needs to be struck. But we would like to avoid an agreement being concluded that wouldn't provide or open up a whole bunch of new opportunities for us.

I wasn't so clear on the question about the profile.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Well, in the last one you said we should have concerted efforts to raise Canada's visibility and profile in India while negotiations are under way. Do you have any specific examples?

[Cam Vidler]

I think there's the example of the government's visit, with Prime Minister Harper as well as Minister Fast, and several other senior government leaders, including a very large business delegation. That trip was in early November.

Those are the types of measures we're speaking of here. It doesn't always necessarily have to be a prime minister's visit or something like that, but our taking initiatives in India through bodies like the trade commissioner service and Export Development Canada. These are ways in which Canada's profile can be boosted.

I think one of the challenges with this negotiation is that India has many countries pursuing its market and pursuing market access. They're negotiating with the Europeans, and there are other countries as well. There's a need to demonstrate why Canada: why they should go through the challenges of providing concessions, having to work with other ministries domestically to be able to present a deal that's attractive to Canada, if Canada is not really seen as a top priority.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

With regard to investment, we've identified some of the barriers to preventing further investment for Canadian companies.

Can you maybe elaborate a little bit more on how you think we can some get short-term quick winds—“early harvest”, as the Taiwanese would call it?